Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 106 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 5
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 1:14pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Command Performance

It was a planned change, though.

We've known for weeks (at least) that the Orville will air on Thursdays starting with episode #3. Does this change your assessment of this being "a bad sign"?

Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 11:22am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Command Performance

The final ratings for episode #2 are here:

Old Wounds: 8.6 million
Command Performance: 6.6 million

Anybody has an idea whether this is good or bad news?

Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 7:34am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: General Discussion

Titles of the first 4 episodes revealed:

If nothing else, DSC will boast the the 2nd longest episode title in Trek history (9 words).
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 3:10am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Command Performance

The strength of the pilot, in my view, is that it is a good *pilot*.

I probably would have disliked it more if it were, say, the 5th episode of the series. But as a pilot, it does a very good job introducing the characters and the tone of the series. Even the bad humor serves this purpose... think of it as an initiation ritual: If you can stick through all those jokes (even grudgingly) then you'll probably enjoy episode #2. Otherwise, the series is probably not for you. :-)
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 12:32am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: General Discussion


"Yes there's so many added benefits to going forward from TNG/DS9/VOY. You can have all those TOS and TNG era aliens but can also show changes in their societies since the TNG era."


I, for one, think that we should see the aftermath of the Dominion War. Did the UFP learn of its mistakes? We were just left hanging there.
Set Bookmark
Tue, Sep 19, 2017, 12:20am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Command Performance


"Kind of leaning towards a 2.5/4 on the Jammer scale.

(I would've rated the premiere a 1.5/4) "

It looks like you had to revise your rating for the premiere downwards... and I think I should too.

I mean, if I give the pilot a low 3 stars and this is definitely better... well, something was obviously off with that rating.

This just demonstrates how difficult it is to rate a new show before it finds its footing. I mean, everybody today agrees that "Encounter at Farpoint" was a mediciore Trek episode, but there's no way I would have given it a mediciore rating when it first aired.

I think I'll just forgo the star ratings for now, until we have a few more episodes with which to make a meaningful scale (I don't envy Jammer, who doesn't have this luxury).

And a note on the current episode: Did anybody notice the random Star Wars joke that was thrown in? I thought it was a nice touch.

Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 4:10pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

Robert, you've said earlier that you decided not to watch the Orville. But from your later posts, it seems that you decided to give the series a chance.

Did you change your mind? If so, I'll be really interested in hearing your opinion on episode #2, which - in my view - is actually about something (two "somethings" actually).
Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 4:01pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Command Performance

Just seen it.

Definitely better than the pilot. Much more meat in the plot, and the humor is better as well.

And I disagree with those who said the plot here was "derivative". While it is true that Trek has indeed done the "unexperienced officer taking command" thing many times, this episode has a fresh perspective on it.

I loved Alara's progress through the episode. And the resolution of the plot was... well, surreal.

But the best thing about this episode is that it does make you think. I'm beginning to question what I've written on the "Old Wounds" thread, that the Orville isn't a worthy Star Trek successor. It still isn't, but I'm beginning to think that it is on the right track of getting there.

Also, interesting cliff-hanger :-)

Can't wait for next week's episode. This show is starting to look surprisingly good!

BTW the animal rights thing is nothing to sneeze at. It is worth noting that Star Trek itself never addressed this issue in any way or form. It's nice to know that in the Orville-verse, at least, there are no zoos on earth. And it's even nicer that they didn't beat us over the head with the message.

Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 2:44pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

"They are vying for the position of what we want in a Star Trek successor. I'm becoming increasingly sure that neither of them is going to be what I personally would want out of a Star Trek successor..."

I don't think there are many people out there who are seriously claiming the Orville is a worthy Star Trek successor.

But you gotta admit, it hits many of the right notes that Discovery doesn't. And it's not a bad show. If people stopped expecting the Orville to be as deep or meaningful or complex as old-school Star Trek, they would enjoy it a lot more.

I'll close with a bold prediction:

Within a few years, you'll get your "worthy Star Trek successor" and it will be breath-takingly wonderful. Either CBS straightens-up in the face of the competition and starts producing offical Trek worthy of the name, or some new excellent show will fill the same niche.

After the Orville opened the way, what I've just said is inevitable. It is just a matter of time.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 10:53am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"Actually, forget I said anything, because the off-putting thing for me is being called out yet again in regards to a conversation that I've politely ended - more than once, btw"

When did that happen?

You basically said: "I see you took offense for no good reason, so let's close the discussion. Oh, and by the way, here is my last word: [more of the same condecending stuff]"

And you're seriously calling this "politely ending the conversation"?

But whatever.

From now on, I'll respect your wishes and not drag this any further.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 8:13am (UTC -5)
Re: DSC S1: General Discussion


I think people are reading way too much into this embargo thing.

It doesn't mean the show will be bad, nor does it mean that they're trying to keep some fantastic twist a secret.

It simply means that CBS is crazily over-protective and secretive about this series, which - quite frankly - shouldn't be news to anybody who didn't hide under a rock in the past 12 months. This secrecy has been their modus operandi for a long time.

Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 2:43am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"And I was being cordial, especially considering that you took an off-hand general statement to heart..."

I'm sorry, but you weren't.

And that "off-hand general statement" was a running theme through your posts. I found it very off-putting and more than a tad disrespectful.
Set Bookmark
Mon, Sep 18, 2017, 2:08am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"I actually agree with you about the prejudging of ST Discovery. You won't see me doing it, and I'd go so far as to say it's off topic in this thread."

Won't comment on the first sentence :-)

But I agree completely on the second. Next, people are going complain that "the nay-sayers are butting into every discussion", even though (a) it was they who brought the specific subject up and (b) they actually brought it up on a thread for another show.

There *is* a Discovery discussion thread, people (and really, I don't think this "debate" should be taken there, either. Have pity on that dead horse, will ya?)
Set Bookmark
Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 8:55am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

Oh, and one more thing:

TV viewers show favoritism all the time. That's an integral part of being a fan of something.

How many Trekkies out there dislike nearly everything about Discovery, yet are commited to see it "just because it is Star Trek"? Probably more than those who opted out "just because it is dark".

See, this thing goes both ways. And there's really nothing wrong with it, as long as we're talking about the personal choices of the viewers.

The problem only starts when people confuse their personal tastes with objective facts.
Set Bookmark
Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 8:34am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"I always presumed that a 'double standard' meant having two differing opinions due to a hidden favoritism of one quality over another."

It is.

You've just restated what Andy's Friend said in different words.

But where's the "hidden favoritism" here? People are openly saying that they prefer thing A (bright sci fi) over thing B (dark sci fi). They are not saying thing A is objectively better. They just say that they enjoy it more.

(and this, by the way, has nothing to do with the criticism on Discovery. See below)

"A *main criticism* shouldn't be about tone, it should be about the actual quality - is the show good at what it sets out to do?"

Exactly. I completely agree. A show should be judged by how well it does what it sets out to do.

Now let us see:

"Discovery" is supposed to be a prequel to the Star Trek we know and love. Look at all the promotional materials we have so far and tell me: Is there any chance at all that it will be "good at what it sets out to do"? The dark tone is just a tiny symptom of a much bigger problem.

OTOH The "Orville" is a Trek-inspired Seth McFarlane sci fi comedy. Knowing Seth McFarlane's renown style, can you honestly say that this show doesn't deliver on what it was set to do? I mean, criticising a McFarlane production for the juvenile humor is like criticising Star Trek for being all spacy and futury. You may not like what the Orville is doing, but it does what it does pretty darn well.

In short, you seem to mixing two different things here:

(1) The personal preference of many people for "bright sci fi"

(2) The Trek-specific points of criticism against Discovery.

These two items don't really have much in common. You don't see people panning GoT just because it is dark. I may not watch the show myself because I don't like the style, but this isn't synonymous to saying the show itself is bad.

I hope this clears up the confusion.

Set Bookmark
Sat, Sep 16, 2017, 11:05pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"Orville wants to be a "dramedy version" of Star Trek, so I'm only judging it by it's own ambitions."

I don't really care what the Orville "wants" to be. I judge the series by what it really is.

And a quick look at the show's characters is all you need to realize that it isn't any "version of Star Trek".

Yes, it is a homage to Star Trek. Yes, it is inspired by Star Trek. But you'll never "get" what the Orville is all about as long as you insist that it is some kind of Star Trek clone.

Because it isn't. It is so different in tone and character, that trying to review an Orville episode as if it were a Star Trek episode is simply pointless.

For one, the Orville is far less cerebral and more light-hearted. For another thing, the characters behave like present-day military men on a vessel away from home - dick jokes and all.

For some reason you see these things as weaknesses, completely missing the fact that they are the main point of the show! Thats the whole premise of the darn thing!

And if that's not your cup of tea, fine. It just means that this show is not for you. But complaining about these things is like a non-Trekkie complaining about the "too perfect characters" in TNG or the fact that most aliens in Trek look humanoid and speak English. It's just silly.

"I already outlined my thoughts on the characters on an earlier comment. I'm not sure where people are drawing their positive feelings from on these guys."

There's a difference between liking the way characters interact with one another onscreen, and wanting to be their close buddy in real life.

And I think they've actually managed to pack quite a lot of punch to the crew's interaction with one another, given that they only had 45 minutes to do it.

Sure, it wasn't super-deep or layered or anything, but the whole thing was fleshed-out quite nicely. I feel that I know exactly how these people relate to one another, which is a pretty impressive feat to accomplish given (a) the time constraints and (b) all the other stuff that happened in the episode.

"You're understating the amount. There was an ejaculation joke, testicle joke, several pee jokes, a boner quip, the aforementioned penis joke and a dog licking it's private parts."

Alright, that's about 7.
(and some of these are more vulgar/tasteless than others. I mean, the dog thing was completely tasteless, even though had the potential to be funny. But Bortus's "that is unfortunate" dialogue is as tame as it can get)

Now, how many non-vulgar jokes and gags where there?

Off the top of my head, I could easly list 14 stand-alone jokes and gags (started listing them here, then realized what a huge spoiler that would be, and deleted everything)

Then there are quite a few classical situation comedy bits, like the argument between Ed and Kelly when she first comes on board.

And of-course, all the various in-jokes that tie into actual Star Trek: From the launch sequence (a clear parody of every Enterprise launch sequence known to man) to Bashir's Dad doing work on genetics.

So no, the vulgar humor wasn't that big a part of the episode. Maybe 1/3 of the jokes, and perhaps even less.

And as I've already stated, "vulgar" does not always mean "not funny". The one-liners, especially, were nearly always hilarious (at least - they worked for me). The biggest groaner was the dog bit, and even that could have been salvaged with a more subtle punch line (something along the lines of "Malloy: did you see... LaMarr: Yup.")

"Even though I did that [brain on popcorn movie mode] with Orville's pilot, I still came away from it with a mostly negative opinion."

This, right there, should have told you that your entire theory of "people liked the Orville because they were eager to turn off their brains" was completely off the mark.

Oh, and I find it utterly hilarious that you've used that argument to defend Jammer's POV on the Orville, when this very same Jammer gave 3 stars to "Star Trek: into Darkness" (while simultaneously acknowledging how stupid that film was, in the very same review)

Talk about double standards...

"I'm still dissatisfied with the double standard that I occasionally see from fans of the Orville pilot in regards to the "Discovery and Orville" topic. Both shows will have their own merits/faults and I hope both shows are worth watching."

It's hard to have "a double standard" when the two things we're comparing are so different from one another.

Discovery is an official Trek installment, and the main criticism against it is that it doesn't respect the established 40-year continuity of the Trek-verse. The second main criticism against it is that it looks too dark and gritty for the liking of many Trekkies.

The Orville, on the other hand, is a brand new series which isn't an "official" anything. It is a very weird blend of a few different styles, but it also happens to scratch that "optimstic bright sci fi" itch that so many of us have suffered from in the past decade. An itch, I must add, that Discovery doesn't make ANY effort to address.

So please explain to me: How is our treatment of these two shows "a double standard"? It certainly seems consistent to me.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Sep 16, 2017, 8:02pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

"I rated it a 3.5 because overall, I found it "delightful" to watch! Do you rate things a 2-2.5 when you find them delightful?"

I too would have rated it a 3.5 (or even a full 4) if the comic delivery was less uneven. Everything else was near-perfect in my view.

I mean, when you make a comedy and botch nearly half your jokes with bad timing in such a spectacular way, that should cost at least a full star.

Classic example:

The dog thing. It could have been hilarious, but (a) the gag was too long and (b) the dialogue that resolved it was to on-the-nose.

At least that's my take on it. YMM (and probably does) V.

Set Bookmark
Sat, Sep 16, 2017, 7:53pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

@ Cosmic

"And people have already pointed out the various issues with all of those things, but I guess Orville gets a free pass on just about everything."

No. It simply means that other people have different tastes and priorities, as to what they regard an "issue" or not.

Case in point: Star Trek itself has lots of issues. Any Trekkie with an ounce of self-awareness could write a thick book on the silly tropes and unrealistic premises of the Star Trek Universe.

So does that mean that the typical Trekkie gives Star Trek "a free pass on just about everything"? (read that last sentence again, pause, and reflect at the hilarious absurdity of those words)

"I bring up the issues with a lot of the gags/jokes (which were revealed in the promos anyways) and people go 'Yeah, the humor was dumb, but...' The humor was a large part of the show, you're ignoring a huge amount of the episode."

Well, first of all, not all of humor was dumb. You're probably refering to the vulgar jokes, but that's just a small fraction of the humor content of the episode.

Secondly, just because something is "dumb" does not necessarily mean it wasn't funny. I mean, "Malloy has drawn a lot of penises on a lot of things" is hardly high-class material, but the deadpan way that Seth said that line made me laugh out loud.

Thirdly, the entire episode gives a humorous vibe even when there isn't any gag or joke actively "playing". You can feel the comedic atmosphere in the air all the time (with the exception of a few scenes were it would - indeed - be inappropriate). And I enjoyed this light-hearted tone very much.

"...Take that away and you have characters that are (so far) bland/unlikable..."

That's a matter of personal taste.

I, personally, happened to like the characters and their dynamics.

"... and a universe/story that largely feels uninspired."

Again - personal taste.

I really dig the Orville-verse. If nothing else, it's 25th earth is visually beautiful (far more beautiful than any version of earth we've seen in Star Trek, by the way).

But you already knew that. I mean, why would you think anyone is going to "give the show a free pass" unless they dig the setting?

"The tree resolution was kinda cool, but it doesn't excuse all the points that have already been stated."

I agree.

If you don't enjoy any of the humor and disliked the characters... well, then there isn't really a reason for you to watch this show, is there?

Just remember: Other people may enjoy different things than you. That doesn't make their standards necessarily "lower". Just different.

"I guess people are eager to turn off their brains these days and that's totally fair."

Oh, come on now. That's a pretty condescending statement, isn't it?

A fairer statement would be that people are eager to get a specific kind of entertainment (in this case - bright sci fi) and don't particularly care whether it is 'brainy' or not.

This, mind you, does not mean that we would have accepted ANYTHING. The show still needs to be good on its own terms, which the Orville - I think - is.

Or at least, the pilot was.

There are still many ways they can botch this, especially given the synopses of the next two episodes. Those two might turn out to be a disaster... then again, this is what I thought about the pilot as well, and I was pleasantly surprised.

I guess we'll see how well (or badly) it goes tomorrow.

"Ironically, some of the Orville fans seem eager to nail Discovery down for every little detail, but when it comes to discussing Orville's faults they just wave it off and say 'Whatever man, it was fun' ".

Perhaps because Discovery is part of a 50-year-old franchise that already has plenty of ground rules in place?

But really, nobody is nailing Discovery "for every little detail". People are nailing it mostly for showing disrespect to the source material (as well as disresepect for the fans themselves).

And you know something? The Orville, with all the juvenile humor and "brainless" vibe, still shows far more respect to the Star Trek legacy than Discovery. Right there is another reason I love this show (and another reason why I wouldn't have given it a pass if it were crappy. Crappy TV does not make for good homages).

Of-course, it remains to be seen whether the Orville can respect its *own* legacy and continuity as the season progresses. If they start changing random things between episodes without any good reason, my appreciation for the show will drop considerably.

"Maybe re-read my comments, because it's me sharing my views and trying to understand this sort of overwhelming praise for a show that (to me) has juvenile humor and shoddy writing."

Then I hope my reply helped you understand this conundrum a bit better.
Set Bookmark
Sat, Sep 16, 2017, 1:52pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"He isn't wrong that certain people seem to be REALLY generous when it comes to this simple pilot episode. Unless you seriously enjoy the humor that it is presenting, there's not a whole lot to take away from this show at the moment."

People have already explained what they take from it: The bright future visuals, the everyman feeling of the crew, the sci fi plot and completely crazy resolution, the general light-hearted tone.

Was it a great episode? No.

Was it an enjoyable ride that left me wanting more? Hell, yeah!

As for the "simplistic sci fi plot": That's not a problem unless nothing else of interest is going on. Given that this is a 45 minute pilot which has to familiarize us with the characters and the setting, I think that "simple" actually works best here. Besides, I just adored the zany resolution. I mean, how often do we get to see our heros destroy an enemy ship with a f***-ing tree?

Happy Arbor Day :-D
Set Bookmark
Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 6:07pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

So here's the million dollar question:

Which episode did you enjoy more when you first so it: The Orville's pilot or "Encounter at Farpoint"?

Set Bookmark
Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 1:06pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

@Del Duio

"I love DS9, it's my favorite Trek by far. And there were LOTS of light moments to it. I wish it were remembered for being an overall good show in stead of just the 'black sheep, oh so dark and gritty blah blah'."

How prevalent is this negative view of DS9 anyway?

I thought the general Trekkie consensus "is* that DS9 was great show, and the nay-sayers were a very tiny minority. Is this impression of mine wrong?

Set Bookmark
Wed, Sep 13, 2017, 7:26pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"That's totally fair, but a show where the characters are randomly calling each other b**** and saying "Ha, that dog was licking it's private parts!" doesn't strike me as a *good* alternative to Star Trek."

Oh, I agree with you.

But the Orville is much more than those stupid juvenile jokes. As I said in my first post on this thread, these jokes are by far the weakest part of the show (though some of them did get a chuckle out of me).

And I really do love everything else about that show: The bright future, the zany futurama-style plot, the flawed "anti-Trek" crew.

So yes, I do think that the Orville is a pretty good alternative.

Besides, I'm more willing to forgive a dog licking its balls than swallow all the stuff that Discovery has already done wrong (which is quite a feat, given the fact that IT HASN'T EVEN BEEN AIRED YET). Robert already explained beautifully *some* of the problems with DIS (DSC?), and he barely scratched the tip of the ice-berg on that one.

At any rate, hopefully in the future we'll have better options to choose from. But even then, I may very well continue to watch the Orville for fun, because I *do* find it enjoyable.

"I once had roommates who watched American Dad everyday and they would just stare at the screen as the jokes passed by.... Seth MacFarlane's writing tends to go in one ear and out the other. So, to me, his brand of writing is not a worthy replacement to a good Star Trek show."

Yeah, but Seth really toned down his usual humor for the Orville - both in frequency and in style. It's like he was trying really really hard to change his usual ways when doing this show (which is a life dream of his), but couldn't bring himself to get rid of those jokes completely.

And to be honest, I'm not even certain that the remaining low brow jokes are damaging the series. Yes, they are stupid and juvenile. But somehow, when I consider the context of all the other (genuinely good) elements of the show, the humor kinda grew on me. It's funny... but after watching the pilot, I just can't imagine the Orville universe without an occasional dog licking its balls and a Malloy "drawing many penises on many things". Dunno why, but that's how I feel about it.

Set Bookmark
Wed, Sep 13, 2017, 6:33pm (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"Actually, I meant to say ST:Beyond, in which case I totally agree with N. I'll try not to engage such posters since they seem to enjoy the attention from it..."

You might want to try harder.

I'm not replying "because I enjoy it". I'm replying because your insinuations are annoying and my finger itch to respond.

But no more. Since obviously nobody here (including you and me) finds this off-topic tangent to be enjoyable or productive, I'm bowing out of this "discussion".

Set Bookmark
Wed, Sep 13, 2017, 11:48am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds

@Chrome "It's like if you hate it so much, why are you spending so much time on it?"

Maybe because it is part of a franchise that I do love?

You can bet that if "Discovery" wasn't a Star Trek series, I wouldn't have said a word on it.

And of-course, I've already explained this like a thousand times on that other thread.

Oh, and by the way, why are we discussing Discovery on an Orville thread again? Yeah, I know, I've already asked *that* question too.

Set Bookmark
Wed, Sep 13, 2017, 9:27am (UTC -5)
Re: ORV S1: Old Wounds


"Can we meaningfully separate the opprobrium surrounding Discovery - which hasn't even aired yet! - from the negativity that DS9 consistently received (and still receives) from a share of the fandom, and should we even try, given that (unlike all other Trek shows) both are darker, serialized shows with a black lead?"

You gotta be kidding...

What does "having a black lead" have to do with anything? And most of the people who bash Discovery actually loved Deep Space 9!

BTW Why are we having a discussion on Discovery in an Orville discussion board? If you're really interested in having a discussion on this, there's already one going on the "Discovery Trailer" page. Then again, we've already beaten this horse to death a dozen times over there, so why even bother?
Next ►Page 1 of 5
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2017 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.